Delhi Court September 1986 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
R. Ramose Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-10-1986
Reported in: (1987)(10)LC614Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Madras dated 31-1-1986 confirming the order of the Assistant Collector of Customs, Madras dated 23-7-1985 absolutely confiscating textiles under seizure in terms of Section 111(d) and (p) besides a penalty of Rs. 750/- under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').2. On 14-7-1985 at about 9.0C a.m. police officials attached to M.I.Police Station searched the appellant as he was found moving in a suspicious manner, and recovered textiles of foreign origin valued at Rs. 5,700/- (GIF). The police authorities effected seizure of the same on a reasonable belief that the goods were smuggled into India and later handed over the goods as well as the appellant to the Customs Department for further action under Customs Law.3. The appellant gave a statement before the Customs Officers on 14-7-1985 inter alia admitting that the goods in question were purchased by him from unknow...
Sunrise Agencies Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-10-1986
Reported in: (1986)(10)ECC118
1. M/s. Sunrise Agencies had imported two consignments, one of 31 bales and Anr. of 21 bales, the goods being "Gskhi-Mckinley both sides coated art paper". These 52 bales were kept in bond and subsequently cleared on five different dates on payment of duty. Duty was assessed under heading 40.01/21 (1) CTA as against heading 48.01/21 (3) CTA as claimed by the appellants. The appellants filed refund claims which were rejected by the Assistant Collector under two orders one dated 30-11-1981 and the other dated 26-2-1982. The rejection was on the basis that the art paper was of weight 210 grams per square meter and that the lower rate of duty claimed by the appellants could be extended only to paper below 180 grams per square meter. Two appeals preferred against the said orders were dismissed by the Appellate Collector under a consolidated order dated 8-6-1982. The Revision Petition filed against the said order was on receipt, on transfer, numbered as appeal No. 118 of 1982; Subsequently,...
Carborundum Universal Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-10-1986
Reported in: (1986)(10)ECC144
1. This is a revision application filed to the Additional Secretary (Revision Application), Department of Revenue and now transferred to this Tribunal as an appeal in terms of Section 35P of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944.2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant received calcined alumina on payment of duty under Tariff Item 68 in its factory at Kanjikode West Palghat for use in manufacture of fused alumina grains and mullite grains. Duty paid on calcined alumina was credited in proforma credit account in terms of Rule 56A after taking the permission of the departmental authorities. Certain quantities of final products, namely alumina grains and mullite grains were despatched to another factory of the appellants without payment of duty in terms of notification 118/75. Since the final products were not liable to duty in terms of the said notification and no duty was actually paid on those final products, credit of duty paid on the input, namely calcined alumina was re...
Tara Chand JaIn Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-10-1986
Reported in: (1986)19ITD566(Delhi)
1. This is an application by the assessee under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), praying that certain questions be referred for the opinion of the High Court.2. During the course of the proceedings, the assessee filed a declaration purporting to be under Section 158A(1) of the Act stating that an identical question of law is pending before the Delhi High Court in respect of the assessee's assessment for the assessment year 1979-80 and if the Tribunal agrees to apply the High Court's decision in the present case, the assessee shall not raise the said question.The application was referred to the ITO and the learned departmental representative filed the ITO's consent dated 23-6-1986 contained in a letter No. ITO-District III C (IV)/86-87/372.3. Initially we were under the impression that Section 158A may apply to the matter in issue. On going through that provision of law which has been inserted with effect from 1-10-1984, we were of the opinion that Section 158A c...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Orissa Concrete Products (P) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-1986
Reported in: (1986)LC379Tri(Delhi)
1. The respondents manufactured concrete sleepers for exclusive supply to the Indian Railways. In the manufacture of such sleepers, an iron component called malleable cast iron insert was used. This component was supplied by the Railways to the respondents free of charge and consequently the respondents did not include its cost in the price of their sleepers. Three points of dispute have arisen in the present appeal for our consideration : (1) the issue on merits - whether the cost of inserts should be included in the assessable value of sleepers under Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. (2) limitation - whether the show cause notice dated 8-10-1982 was time barred, and (3) estoppel - whether, after having approved the first price list No. 1/80 dated 27-2-1980 on 5-10-1980 without inclusion of the cost of inserts, the Assistant Collector was estopped from initiating proceedings to include such cost while approving the subsequent price lists.2. We have heard both sides...
M.J. Exports Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-1986
Reported in: (1986)(10)ECC217
1. This is an appeal against the captioned order-in-original passed by the Principal Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Bombay.2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that M/s Mathuradas Naraindas and Sons, Customs House Agents, presented two shipping bills Nos. 004136 and 004144, both dated 8-5-1985, on behalf of M/s M.3.Exports Pvt. Ltd., (the appellants) to the Customs authorities at Bombay. The bills were for the export of 4000 and 3070 pieces of fishing rods under Duty Exemption Entitlement Certificate (DEEC) No.5328 (BOM) dated 11-12-1984. The goods were described as spinning, telescopic, fishing rods, fibre glass, of 6 parts, in the former case and as spinning fishing rods fibre glass, of 2 parts, in the latter.The shipments were for M/s. Raznoexport, Moscow, U.S.S.R. Both the shipping bills were processed by the Custom House in the usual course on the basis of the shipping documents including the declaration under the D.E.E.C. scheme. The Customs House received int...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Indian Dyestuff Industries Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-1986
Reported in: (1986)(10)ECC132
1. The captioned three appeals have been filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Thane against the three Orders-in-Appeal passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals),. Bombay noted against each appeal.2. The Assistant Collector by his Order No. V(14D)17- 129/PLVC/ 83/1305 dated 28-2-1984 held that Central Excise duty was payable by M/s.Indian Dyestuff Industries Ltd. (the respondents before us) on formulated dyes and that value for the purpose of assessment of duty should be the value of formulated dyes in which state they were sold and not the value at the stage of wet cake. In appeal, this order was set aside by the Collector (Appeals) by his order dated 7-2-85. Appeal No. 965/85-C is against this order.3. By order No. V-140(18)81/84 dated 5-2-85 the Asstt. Collector held that the action of the excise officers of levying, assessing and collecting excise duty at the formulation stage was in order, as per the definition of "manufacture" in Section 2(f) of the Central Excises...
Aravali Ispat Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-1986
Reported in: (1986)(10)ECC212
1. The adjudicating authority has demanded duty of Rs.18711/- and has imposed a penalty of Rs.250/- on the ground that the appellant has availed of benefit of notification 208/83 dated 1.8.83 in the manufacture of iron castings. It has been stated that the said notification gives the benefit of duty on iron casting if it is made out of raw materials specified in the notification alone. The raw materials mentioned in the notification do not include M.S. Scrap which has also been used by the appellant in the manufacture of the said iron castings. It has further been stated by the adjudicating authority that the addition of steel scrap in the list of raw materials was made by amendment of the said notification w.e.f. 1.3.84. vide notification 38/84.2. On the other hand, learned consultant has submitted that the major raw material used in the manufacture of iron castings is old iron scrap which is mentioned in the list of raw materials in notification 208/83.Addition of 20 to 30% of steel...
Birla Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-1986
Reported in: (1987)(10)LC674Tri(Delhi)
1. The questions that arise for determination in this Revision Application to the Government of India, transferred to and heard by the Tribunal pursuant to Section 35P of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 are precisely those that had arisen for determination in another appeal between the same parties decided by us earlier and reported in 1985 (21) ELT 930 [Birla Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd., Calcutta v.Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur -the description of the respondent as the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta, in the said report is wrong]. While the aforesaid reported decision related to the month of October, 1975, the period relevant for the instant appeal is from 1st November, 1975 to 8th January, 1976. In our earlier decision we held that on the application of the principle of resjudicata that appeal had to be allowed. The question as to whether dismissal of a Special Leave Petition by the Supreme Court operates as resjudicata was discussed elaborately in the aforesaid d...
income-tax Officer Vs. Deepak Rathi
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-1986
Reported in: (1986)19ITD637(Delhi)
1. This is a departmental appeal challenging the order of the learned AAC quashing the proceedings of reassessment initiated by the ITO under Section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') in respect of the assessment year 1976-77 against the respondent.2. The facts relevant for determination of the controversy involved in the present case may be noted.3. The assessee is the son of Shri H.K. Rathi. Both reside in the same premises, namely, 29, Sadhna Enclave, New Delhi and are also doing business together. From the aforesaid residential premises many items were seized as per the panchnama prepared on 21-11-1975. Apart from shares, silver utensils, jewellery and cash, that was seized from the said premises, some loose papers were also seized. Shri Deepak Rathi, the present respondent signed all the various annexures and panchnama which was prepared at the time of the search. In course of time, after scrutinising the seized material, the ITO issued notices under Section 132(5) o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »